Psychiatric medications, science, marketing, psychiatry in general, and occasionally clinical psychology. Questioning the role of key opinion leaders and the use of "science" to promote commercial ends rather than the needs of people with mental health concerns.

Friday, May 22, 2009

Yeah, I know the economy is in very bad shape and possibly getting worse. But for the kind of fantastic investigative journalism we get from the inimitable Philip Dawdy at Furious Seasons, one really should whip out the credit card and make a donation. A summary of his good work is available, and his more recent work on Seroquel is worthy of accolades (1, 2).

Actually, I think Mr Dawdy is not the villian at his site, but his entrenched followers, who do not mirror his focus but just instead rail away about anything said positively about psychiatry and just attack anyone who does not echo their pathetic rhetoric. The problem is Mr Dawdy allows it as he has some focus on numbers as validating the value of his site. I think it is time he charges for invested readers who want the information he provides. Newspapers are beginning to figure this out, and I think it is time for him to do it too.

Think about it for a minute here, if he would collect $60 from 250 regular followers, like I am, he would pocket the $15,000 he seems to be targeting for this calendar year. You tell me he doesn't have 250 responsible followers? Note I do not count the usual suspects who diminish the value of the site.

I would bet they as a group donate less than 15% of his yearly total, and yet, they comment over 50% of the fucking time.

Made me get banned, because it is now useless to try to dialogue at the commentary threads. We'll see if people 'come to the plate' if they really value the site.

I read through quite a bit of this site, and frankly, you sound like a Scientologist, with your hostility to psychiatry in general (nope, I don't equate the drug companies with psychiatry - I see the hostility toward both).I'm not in the medical field or employed or associated in any way with drug companies; I'm just a patient, and as the meme goes, "I find your lack of faith disturbing." Actually, irrational. But whatever. It's your life.

If you want to point to a logical flaw in my arguments, inaccuracies in my interpretation of something, or to my facts being off, then go for it -- I welcome such criticism. But just using the tired old trick of calling me a Scientologist (apparently the insult of choice these days), then you're not providing myself or my readers anything of value.

If memory serves, Skillsnotpills/TF ASKED Philip to ban him as he could not control his addiction to responding to posts that rubbed him the wrong way... No?

I actually think psychiatry and scientology may have a bit in common. If anything, scientology is a bit more upfront about being greedy money whores. They both like pseudoscience (aliens vs. chemical imbalance theory), they both have their gadgets (e-meter and ECT), they both use fancy language to describe things that require treatment that can't be tested for objectively.

Breakdown:

Scientology:Get get to go HollywoodYou get gadgetsAliensYou get chicksYou get to tell people what's normalYou get to tell people what to doSignificant benefits at the top

PsychiatryYou get to play doctor with drugsYou letters after your nameYou get gadgetsYou get chicks if you work with pharmaYou get to tell people what's normalYou get to tell people what to doSignificant benefits at the top

Aliens are a huge plus, probably better than playing with drugs. I'm leaning to scientology, better access to chicks that will disrobe because my e-meter told them to. Ya, scientology all the way.

Organizations

Scientific Misconduct

About Me

I'm an academic with a respectable amount of clinical experience and no drug industry funding. Given my lack of time, don't expect multiple daily updates. Certain things about clinical psychology, the drug industry, psychiatry, and academics drive me nuts, and you'll probably pick up on these pet peeves before long...